Bug#687694: Close?
Isn't it time to close this now? Mattias signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Bug#687694: Close?
On 2013-09-05 10:03, Mattias Ellert wrote: Isn't it time to close this now? Mattias Does bouncycastle now force packages the affected reverse dependencies to be upgraded with it? If not, it will still break partial upgrades. ~Niels __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Bug#687694: Close?
Le 05/09/2013 10:19, Niels Thykier a écrit : Does bouncycastle now force packages the affected reverse dependencies to be upgraded with it? If not, it will still break partial upgrades. All of the reverse dependencies that were updated in this transition have the correct versionned dependency on bouncycastle. Is it enough or do we have to declare Breaks for the reverse dependencies affected in bouncycastle? Emmanuel Bourg __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Bug#687694: Close?
On 2013-09-05 11:01, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: Le 05/09/2013 10:19, Niels Thykier a écrit : Does bouncycastle now force packages the affected reverse dependencies to be upgraded with it? If not, it will still break partial upgrades. All of the reverse dependencies that were updated in this transition have the correct versionned dependency on bouncycastle. Is it enough or do we have to declare Breaks for the reverse dependencies affected in bouncycastle? Emmanuel Bourg [...] We generally still need Breaks. The problem is: $rdep version X Depends on $bc = 1.44 $bc version 1.44 $bc version 1.46 - not compatible with $bc 1.44 $rdep version Y Depends on $bc = 1.46 Here, APT or a user can choose to only upgrade $bc to version 1.46 and keep $rdep at version X. In this case, $rdep is broken but APT thinks it will just work(tm) and therefore allow it. On the other hand, if $bc version 1.46 Breaks $rdep Y~, then APT will see that it has to upgrade both or none at all. ~Niels __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processing of findbugs_2.0.2-1_amd64.changes
findbugs_2.0.2-1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: findbugs_2.0.2-1.dsc findbugs_2.0.2.orig.tar.gz findbugs_2.0.2-1.debian.tar.gz findbugs_2.0.2-1_all.deb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org) __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
findbugs_2.0.2-1_amd64.changes is NEW
binary:findbugs is NEW. source:findbugs is NEW. Your package contains new components which requires manual editing of the override file. It is ok otherwise, so please be patient. New packages are usually added to the override file about once a week. __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Bug#721925: saxonb is not free
Package: saxonb Severity: serious As per discussion with ftp team, we have an issue with files in saxonb: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-java-maintainers/2013-September/043308.html -- Forwarded message -- From: Michael Kay m...@saxonica.com Date: Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 11:24 PM Subject: Re: Saxon-HE copyright To: Eugene Zhukov jevgeni...@gmail.com These Java interface definitions are taken from the XQJ specification, JSR 225, which you can find here: http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/final/jsr225/index.html along with the licensing terms. An extract of the license is: In addition, to the extent that an implementation of the Specification would be considered a derivative work under applicable law requiring a license grant from the holder of the copyright in the Specification, the Spec Lead grants a copyright license solely for the purpose of making and/or distributing an implementation of the Specification that: (a) except for the RI code licensed from Oracle under the RI License which is attached hereto as Exhibit B, does not include or otherwise make any use of the RI; (b) fully implements the Specification including all of its required interfaces and functionality; (c) does not modify, subset, superset or otherwise extend those public class or interface declarations whose names begin with “java;” and (d) passes the TCK. In other words: Saxon, as an implementation of the XQJ specification, takes advantage of the copyright license granted by Oracle, and satisifies the terms of this license insofar as it is a complete implementation of the specification and passes the TCK. NOTE: I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. Michael Kay Saxonica __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
wagon 1.0.0-4 MIGRATED to testing
FYI: The status of the wagon source package in Debian's testing distribution has changed. Previous version: 1.0.0-2 Current version: 1.0.0-4 -- This email is automatically generated once a day. As the installation of new packages into testing happens multiple times a day you will receive later changes on the next day. See http://release.debian.org/testing-watch/ for more information. __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Bug#721950: libjcsp-java: Please provide Maven artifacts
Package: libjcsp-java Version: 1.1-rc4-1 Severity: important As title says. -- System Information: Debian Release: 7.1 APT prefers stable-updates APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-4-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash -- Miguel Landaeta, miguel at miguel.cc secure email with PGP 0x6E608B637D8967E9 available at http://keyserver.pgp.com/ Faith means not wanting to know what is true. -- Nietzsche signature.asc Description: Digital signature __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Bug#721953: eclipse: fatal error in soup_session_feature_detach with WebKitGTK+ = 1.11.91
Package: eclipse Version: 3.8.1-4 Severity: important Dear Maintainer, With recent versions of WebKitGTK+, Eclipse crashes whenever Javadoc hover help is to be displayed in the Java editor. Looks this happens because WebKit doesn't attach a default Authenticate listener and therefore WebKitGTK.soup_session_get_feature() returns 0 in WebKit.create(). See linked eclipse bug report for fix that should be applied in debian/patches/. https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=404776 -- System Information: Debian Release: jessie/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 3.10-2-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages eclipse depends on: ii eclipse-jdt 3.8.1-4 ii eclipse-pde 3.8.1-4 eclipse recommends no packages. Versions of packages eclipse-platform depends on: ii ant1.9.1-1 ii ant-optional 1.9.1-1 ii default-jre [java6-runtime]1:1.7-49 ii eclipse-platform-data 3.8.1-4 ii eclipse-rcp3.8.1-4 ii gconf-service 3.2.6-1 ii ibm-j2sdk1.6 [java6-runtime] 1.6.0.13.2-0 ii java-common0.49 ii libc6 2.17-92 ii libcommons-codec-java 1.8-1 ii libcommons-httpclient-java 3.1-10.2 ii libcommons-logging-java1.1.3-1 ii libgconf-2-4 3.2.6-1 ii libglib2.0-0 2.36.4-1 ii libjetty8-java 8.1.3-8 ii libjsch-java 0.1.50-1 ii liblucene2-java2.9.4+ds1-4 ii libservlet3.0-java 7.0.42-1 ii multiarch-support 2.17-92 ii openjdk-7-jre [java6-runtime] 7u21-2.3.9-5 ii sat4j 2.3.2-1 Versions of packages eclipse-platform recommends: ii eclipse-pde 3.8.1-4 Versions of packages eclipse-platform suggests: ii eclipse-jdt 3.8.1-4 Versions of packages eclipse-pde depends on: ii default-jre [java6-runtime]1:1.7-49 ii eclipse-jdt3.8.1-4 ii eclipse-platform 3.8.1-4 ii ibm-j2sdk1.6 [java6-runtime] 1.6.0.13.2-0 ii libasm3-java 3.3.2-2 ii openjdk-7-jre [java6-runtime] 7u21-2.3.9-5 eclipse-pde suggests no packages. Versions of packages eclipse-jdt depends on: ii default-jre [java6-runtime]1:1.7-49 ii eclipse-platform 3.8.1-4 ii ibm-j2sdk1.6 [java6-runtime] 1.6.0.13.2-0 ii junit 3.8.2-8 ii junit4 4.11-2 ii libhamcrest-java 1.3-2 ii openjdk-7-jre [java6-runtime] 7u21-2.3.9-5 Versions of packages eclipse-jdt recommends: ii default-jdk 1:1.7-49 ii ibm-j2sdk1.6 [default-jdk] 1.6.0.13.2-0 eclipse-jdt suggests no packages. -- no debconf information __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
